News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Ruby Is Defined by Terrible Tools by rquantz on Wednesday July 08, 2015 @12:17PM (#9852645)
So what's a language that has much better tooling than ruby, but still has a web stack as good as Rails? Does one exist?
Re:Ruby Is Defined by Terrible Tools by rickr on Wednesday July 08, 2015 @03:13PM (#9853972)
I've just started messing with elixir. It's a functional language that runs on the Erlang VM but it's syntax is ruby-ish.

I'm a newbie but I've been impressed by the tooling so far. And once you change how you think about everything the learning curve isn't too bad. =)

It has a rails-y framework that I haven't heard much about (and nothing particularly bad):

https://github.com/phoenixframework/phoenix

Re:Ruby Is Defined by Terrible Tools by lelandbatey on Wednesday July 08, 2015 @12:22PM (#9852696)
Some people would say "Python", since the tooling for Python is generally excellent, but I don't have enough experience with Python web stacks to say that they're better or worse than Rails. There's certainly less "magic" with Python, but I'd argue that's a good thing.
Re:Ruby Is Defined by Terrible Tools by mtarnovan on Wednesday July 08, 2015 @01:30PM (#9853259)
I think all the criticism from that article applies to Python as well.
Re:Ruby Is Defined by Terrible Tools by andybak on Thursday July 09, 2015 @01:59PM (#9859582)
Not all of them. Python is often stricter in some aspects of the language and in community norms.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but the module namespacing helps mitigate this complaint via Twitter:

> Can't figure out how a simple thing works in a codebase with a zillion tiny objects and a billion levels of indirection?

i.e. unless you've gone out of your way to be too clever - you usually know where things in the current namespace came from.

Re:Ruby Is Defined by Terrible Tools by PuercoPop on Wednesday July 08, 2015 @02:57PM (#9853892)
Give Pharo a try, I think you'd be pleasantly surprised.